“Inclusive Devolution”

Here are the main points of the RSA publication referred to in the previous post:

A new policy framework to promote inclusive growth

The report proposes a policy framework based on the following elements:

Integrating economic and social policy — we argue for a model which combines economic and social policy to generate inclusive growth. That means integrating people-focused policies on skills, family support and education with economic development strategies linked to investment and industry policy.

Devolution that is social as well as economic — up until now, devolution to cities has mostly related to strategic economic functions. The next phase of devolution needs to have a much stronger social policy focus so that public service reform can support local growth.

More funding to support inclusive growth at local level — the context for devolution so far has been fiscal neutrality and austerity. The establishment of investment funds and the transfer of economic functions has been good for cities, but at the same time their overall revenue budgets have shrunk substantially. The next phase of what we call ‘grown up devolution’ will need to provide more funding for social and capital projects.

Prioritising prevention and early intervention — it is widely accepted that we spend too much on picking up the pieces of social and economic failure. Now is the time to begin the process of shifting the balance of spending towards prevention and early intervention, so that public services can support inclusive growth, rather than respond to the lack of it.

View at Medium.com

Grass roots community action in Athens

“Navarinou Park – part playground, part open-air cinema, part vegetable garden and verdant oasis – was never meant to be. On that, all of its participants agree. Stavros Stavrides, a professor of architecture at Athens’ National Technical University, is the first to say it; so, too, do the local residents who, spade in hand, also worked to transform an unprepossessing parking lot on the rim of Athens’ edgy Exarcheia district into a vibrant community garden.

“Who’d have thought?” asks Effie Saroglou, a dancer, walking her dark-haired mutt around the park. “Who’d have imagined us ever sitting here?” says Yannis Mandris, a musician, watching a grainy rendition of Blade Runner in a makeshift arena on the other side of the lot. Something is stirring in the Greek capital – and in more ways than one Navarinou Park has come to represent it.

Stavrides calls it a movement, a new form of commons in which public-spirited individuals reclaim public space; others an informal urbanism born of a spirit of solidarity that has taken hold since Europe’s economic crisis erupted in Greece in 2009. For in Navarinou – a place run by neighbourhood committee – citizens have sought new ways of overcoming the trauma of economic collapse. And they have done so by creating a place where, self-contained and seemingly beyond the reach of authority, they can meet, converse, play and produce food.

Bereft of civic protection and the great umbrella of the welfare state, grassroots groups across Athens have followed suit. …

… “What we are witnessing is an explosion of social networks born of bottom-up initiatives,” says Stavrides, who was among the activists whose spontaneous efforts stopped [a parking lot] being turned into a parking space in late 2009. “Navarinou heralded this new culture, this new spirit of people taking their lives into their own hands. They know that they can no longer expect the state to support them and through this process, they are discovering how important it is to share.”

“Increasingly, local associations, resident committees and solidarity groups are forging ties, exchanging know-how, giving shape to new concepts of co-existence, and in so doing, reshaping public space.

“The crisis has made a lot of Greeks want to work together,” says Lydia Carras, who oversees the long-established Elliniki Etairia Society for the Environment and Cultural Heritage from a building at the foot of the Acropolis. “There is a new mood of cooperation because people understand that the only way to get their voice heard is to make alliances.”

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/sep/21/athens-unofficial-community-hope-government-failures?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Report: “Getting ready for ageing”

“… Stop seeing ageing as being about older people: Ageing is about all of us. It isn’t about young versus old. We will fail to tackle the challenges and make the most of the opportunities of ageing whilst we pitch one generation against another.

Stop ignoring the demands and needs of an ageing population: In Government there is not and never has been a Minister, senior social or other post holder such as a ‘Commissioner’ or ‘Tsar’, or any cross cutting unit or Government strategy on an ageing society.

Stop delivering communities which fail to deliver beyond the basics: Sadly, many communities are even failing to provide the basics of public toilets and places to rest. A fear of falling and of crime acts as a barrier to getting out and about for many older people. We must deliver a more ambitious vision for our communities: of places which are fun and engaging for all ages, whilst also reducing the risk of isolation and loneliness.

End the discrimination: Age discrimination remains a barrier to the participation of older people in society. Legislation has gone some way to prevent discrimination but policymakers must ensure that older people are not prevented from accessing products and services simply because of their age. We all need to play a part in normalising ageing.

Reverse the decline in new and appropriate housing stock for older people: The numbers of new retirement homes being built are being allowed to fall at the same time as the numbers of older people are rapidly increasing. Too few new homes are being built. Those which are, are too often not accessible or adaptable for old age.

Stop ignoring the crisis in social care: Government investment in social care is sharply shrinking while the numbers of older people who need it are rising, yet good social care saves public money by reducing and postponing older people’s need for expensive acute hospital care and helps them to live independently for longer. Good social care for older people also allows family members to keep in employment – so they are not forced to choose between work and caring for an older relative.

Stop operating hospitals on a model designed for the past: Hospitals of the 21st Century are increasingly made up of older patients with complex needs. Sta ratios on hospital wards dedicated to older people, many of them with dementia, are typically lower than those in general wards. Yet we know that these older people often have greater need of help with essentials like eating and drinking.

Stop under-utilising older people: The over 65s in the UK currently spend around £2.2 billion per week (£114 billion per annum) on goods and services. Assuming the spending of the 65+ population rises in line with annual in ation of 2%, their spending will reach over £6 billion per week by 20377. People aged 65 and over in the UK last year contributed £61bn to the economy through employment, informal caring and volunteering. Yet almost four in ten workers aged 55-64 are not working. And almost half of the unemployed of this age range are in long term unemployment. We must do more to maximise the social and economic contribution of older people.” …

http://www.cpa.org.uk/cpa/docs/Ready_for_Ageing_Alliance_Manifesto.pdf

Housing and age segregation

Young families are being “ghettoised” in inner city areas by the housing crisis while older homeowners become isolated in the suburbs, a report says.
The Intergenerational Foundation says the number of areas dominated by over-50s has risen sevenfold since 1991 as young people move into the cities.
Even within urban areas, older people, children and young adults are living increasingly separate lives, it adds.

The government said housebuilding was an “absolute priority”.
The foundation, which aims to protect the rights of younger generations in policy-making, analysed segregation by age in local areas across the UK. …

… Mr Hanton said that now only 5% of people living in the same area as someone over 18 are over 65, compared to 15% in 1991.

This was weakening the bonds between the generations and leads to a lack of understanding of each other, he said.

Nigel Wilson, chief executive of Legal and General, said: “We have created an inter-generationally unfair society. …”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37385292

And in East Devon we put the rich home-owning old in Sidmouth and the young renting poor in Cranbrook

Voluntary sector demands to be involved in devolution bids

Dream on people – you are seen as a cost not a benefit or asset to our “growth led” devolution bid.

“A group of more than 30 voluntary sector leaders has set out a statement of principles for devolution across England that includes a call for greater involvement of voluntary organisations in local decision-making.

At a summit held in London on 7 September, the group set out steps that should be taken to put people at the heart of devolution in England.

Among the 16 points – covering voice and advocacy, financing devolution, and public service reform – was a call for an agreement between devolved authorities, elected officials and the voluntary sector around the design, commissioning, funding and delivery of public services.

Under the government’s devolution programme, combined authorities have reached a series of deals with Whitehall that will see them take on more powers over services including transport, planning and skills. These deals are in place in Greater Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham and Liverpool and the Tees Valley, although a deal for the North East Combined Authority was rejected by four of the seven councils involved last week.

At the Devolution and the Voluntary Sector Summit, leaders said devolved areas must be given the time and resources to create new democratic methods. The summit was convened by Charity Finance Group, Children England, Locality and the National Association for Voluntary and Community Action.

These new methods should not be tied to pre-existing structures and processes. There also needed to be a commitment to local and specialist voluntary organisations to help engage people and communities in devolved decisions. Of particular focus in this endeavour should be disadvantaged and disenfranchised groups.

The group expressed the view that no financial settlement should be agreed with an area until there had been an opportunity to map and assess the local needs and resources (including voluntary and private sector assets). Ahead of the government’s implementation of full business rates localisation, the summit also called on ministers to develop a method of distributing resources post-devolution that ensured that inequalities were not locked in.

The statement called for devolution to be based on the principle of subsidiary, as well as highlighting the need for an agreement between devolved authorities, elected officials and the voluntary sector about the design, commissioning, funding and delivery of public services.

Services should be commissioned on the basis of long term social outcomes rather than short term financial pressures, the group stated. Meanwhile, central government must articulate at the beginning of the process how it is accountable for services that will be devolved.

Caron Bradshaw, chief executive of Charity Finance Group, said the vision for devolution could reset the high-profile devolution drive with full involvement of the voluntary sector as an active partner to support communities.

Locality chief executive Tony Armstrong added: “There is a clear opportunity for devolution to harness the capacity and ideas of local people and organisations to transform their communities. But there is a risk that the devolution agenda is missing this potential.

“The devolution summit has been an important moment for us to come together as a sector, and think about what good devolution looks like and the principles that are essential for making this happen.”

Co-operative Party to split from Labour?

“The Co-operative party aims to develop some “distinctive and independent” policy stances separate from those of Labour, its chairman has said before the party’s annual conference.

The political movement, whose strapline is “politics for people”, has been allied to Labour since 1927, and 25 MPs currently sit in parliament on a joint ticket.

The party recently rejected speculation that it could be a vehicle for Labour MPs who oppose Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership to split away and form their own movement. It is staying neutral in the Labour leadership contest.

Gareth Thomas, the MP for Harrow West and Co-operative chair, said the party would be making more of an effort ahead of its 100-year anniversary in 2017 to develop a voice more of its own.

“We want to be more distinctive,” he said. “We are very clear we want to stay in the [European] single market. We see it as an exercise in international cooperation. And we are pretty pro-business as a party. It is co-op businesses that set us up and which continue to affiliate to us, and it is one of the things that marks us out. We have very good links into the co-operative business community as well.”

The party is launching a policy pamphlet arguing for care recipients, their families and carers to be represented on the boards of private companies providing social care services.

It is also calling for carers working for private social care providers, many of whom are very low paid, to have a right to take over their company – a “right to own” – if it is at risk of closure or is changing hands.

The party said the measures were being put forward to tackle the twin crises in adult social care in England: concerns about poor quality care, and endemic low pay and poor terms and conditions for the workforce.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/09/co-operative-party-policies-distinct-labour-100-anniversary

Inequality in Devon

Devon amongst best places for pensioners to live:
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/devon-among-best-areas-to-live-for-pensioners/story-29670697-detail/story.html

Torquay one of the worst places to raise a family:
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/torquay-one-of-the-worst-places-to-raise-a-family/story-29668678-detail/story.html

Discuss.

“Home ownership in England at lowest level in 30 years as housing crisis grows”

“Home ownership in England has fallen to its lowest level in 30 years as the growing gap between earnings and property prices has created a housing crisis that extends beyond London to cities including Manchester.

The struggle to get on the housing ladder is not just a feature of the London property market, according to a new report by the Resolution Foundation thinktank, with Greater Manchester seeing as big a slump in ownership since its peak in the early 2000s as parts of the capital, and cities in Yorkshire and the West Midlands also seeing sharp drops.

Home ownership across England reached a peak in April 2003, when 71% of households owned their home, either outright or with a mortgage, but by February this year the figure had fallen to 64%, the Resolution Foundation said.

The figure is the lowest since 1986, when homeownership levels were on the way up, with a housing market boom fuelled by the deregulation of the mortgage industry and the introduction of the right-to-buy policy for council homes by Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government. …

… Lindsay Judge, an expert on housing at the thinktank, said the problem was one of affordability. “House prices began to outpace earnings in the early 2000s,” Judge said. “When the market fell so did earnings – house prices began to come down but so did people’s pay, or it was stagnating at best, so few people were able to make the most of falling prices.”

The analysis showed that across England levels of private renting almost doubled from 11% in 2003 to 19% in 2015, while in Greater Manchester the figure more than trebled, from 6% to 20%.

The Resolution Foundation said this shift in tenure could mean problems in the future, as individuals would need to find a way of funding their housing in retirement, or may need to turn to the benefits system for help. Clarke said: “The shift to renting privately can reduce current living standards and future wealth, with implications for individuals and the state. We cannot allow other cities to edge towards the kind of housing crisis that London has been saddled with.”

Anne Baxendale, head of policy and public affairs at the housing charity Shelter, said house prices were now “completely out of step with average wages”.

She added: “Sky-high rents are leaving many families struggling to make ends meet each month, let alone save up enough for the deposit on a home. Far from being the stepping stone it once was, many young people and families are now facing a lifetime stuck in expensive and unstable private renting. …”n

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/02/home-ownership-in-england-at-lowest-level-in-30-years-as-housing-crisis-grows

Claire Wright acts quickly on Lloyds Bank closures

Although Claire Wright is appealing on behalf of Ottery St Mary, this could equally apply to all the smaller towns of East Devon:

Following the devastating news this morning about Lloyds Bank proposing to axe 3000 jobs and close 200 branches I have written to the bank’s chief executive, Antonio Osorio…….

Dear Mr Osorio

I was dismayed to read the news this morning about your decision to close 200 branches of Lloyds Bank with a loss of 3000 jobs.

I realise that this must have been a horribly difficult decision to make as it will cause much hardship for your staff and for the communities where branches are closed.

I felt I must write straightaway however, to implore you not to shut our Lloyds branch here in Ottery St Mary.

Ottery’s branch is the only bank now left in the town, which has a population (including nearby villages) of around 10,000. Hundreds of new houses are given planning consent and will be built in the coming months and years.

I know from talking to local people and traders that they really value your bank and whenever I pass it, it always seems busy.

The town’s traders unsurprisingly are finding things tough during these difficult times and several businesses have closed in recent times. If Lloyds closed here it would make things harder for them, as they would need to take a 10 mile round trip to either Sidmouth or Honiton to do their banking, potentially several times a week.

Ottery also has a large proportion of elderly people, many of whom do not have their own transport. I know that many elderly people living here rely on being able to bank in the town. Closing it would mean a 10 mile round trip on public transport. Fine for a fit person but potentially very hard for someone who is not in the best of health or who is infirm. Elderly people would be very disadvantaged by such a decision.

I realise that wherever you close branches people will be upset, but I would urge you to keep Ottery’s branch open for the reasons above.

Kind regards

Best wishes
Claire

Mr Osorio’s email address is antonio.osorio@lloydsbanking.com – please drop him a line urgently if you can, saying how much Lloyds means to you and what it would mean to you if lost!

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/lloyds_bank_chief_executive_urged_to_retain_otterys_branch_in_face_of_cuts

MD of Butlins warns of seaside degeneration and youth unemployment

“In her first speech as prime minister, Theresa May set out her goals to tackle the social injustices faced by many, including the working-class young. One to add to the list is that of young people who come from our coastal and seaside towns.

The UK’s coastline is 7,700 miles (12,400km) long and contributes hugely to our cultural wellbeing. Some 250 million visits are made to the coast each year but it is an inconvenient fact that if you come from our seaside towns you are more likely to be poorly educated, unemployed, unemployable, lacking in ambition, claiming benefits and living in multiple-occupation housing.

This is largely down to the long-term decline of fishing, agriculture and tourism — the industries that traditionally supported coastal communities. Tourism could arrest that decline if government helped to create the environment to allow businesses to do so. Although tourism is the UK’s sixth largest export earner and employs nearly 10 per cent of the working population, it could do better.

A recent survey found that more than half of the British public have not visited the seaside in the past three years, 30 per cent have not visited as an adult and 65 per cent believe the seaside is run down and in need of investment.

This is why the British Hospitality Association has come up with a plan to revive these communities. The first step is to appoint a seaside tsar, someone to co-ordinate government and local authority spending. This person, who needs to be strong enough to make a real difference, would oversee the creation of coastal enterprise zones to bring in investment and encourage businesses to move to the coast.

The second initiative is to create a tax environment that encourages people to visit and coastal businesses to invest in themselves. The obvious incentive for visitors is a reduction in tourism VAT — on accommodation and visitor attractions. UK visitors are taxed harder than almost everyone else in Europe for simply going on holiday. Our tourism VAT rate is a punitive 20 per cent while the average in Europe is half that.

If Mrs May is serious about rebalancing the economy, tourism is one industry that can deliver export growth by creating a seaside that is worth going back to.”

Dermot King is managing director of Butlins and chairman of the Cut Tourism VAT Campaign

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/our-seaside-towns-need-a-serious-economic-boost-8n9550crk

Working families largest group of “new poor” not the unemployed or pensioners

“Improving the income of the working poor is the key to reducing inequality, according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies.

Its study Living Standards, Poverty and Inequality in the UK: 2016, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, was published today at an event in central London. It highlights some significant changes to the nature of poverty in the UK.

Pensioners’ incomes have risen to the extent that they are now the least likely major demographic group to be in income poverty, after housing costs. Another crucial development is that more people are in work than ever before.

Also, the proportion of children living in a household where no-one works has fallen from nearly one in four in 1994-95 to less than one in six in 2014-15.

Subsequently, the report found the “new poor” tend to be located in houses where there is someone in work. Only one-third of children below the government’s absolute poverty line now live in a workless household. The remainder (two-thirds) of those classed as poor are poor despite the fact that at least one of their parents is in work.

A negative consequence of this change is that poor households are therefore more sensitive to labour market fluctuations than those of the past. It also means that initiatives designed to allay child poverty will be less effective if the focus remains on getting people into work.

For the poorest fifth of households today, income from employment makes up half of total income. Twenty years ago, this figure was under one-third, indicating a greater reliance on benefits and tax credits.

In the report, the IFS stated that if new prime minister Theresa May took the decision to continue the ‘life chances’ strategy started under David Cameron, it should be aimed at raising the economic prospects of working households. …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/07/poverty-now-resides-within-working-households-says-ifs

Jo Cox, MP

Jo Cox’s funeral took place today.

Her husband’s message:

Jo would ask us not to fight hate with hate but draw together to drain the swamp that extremism breeds in. Thinking of all victims of hatred today”

Jo’s fund is just £15,000 short of its £1.5 milion target for three charities she supported: Royal Voluntary Service, Hope Not Hate and The White Helmets, each of which will get one-third of the funds raised.

It would be a fitting tribute to her to see that target achieved today.

https://www.gofundme.com/jocox

American company in UK dumps its pension fund into UK taxpayer rescue package

“An American company has struck a secret deal which allows it to walk away from the British pension scheme of engineering firm Halcrow – jeopardising the retirements of thousands of workers and setting a dangerous precedent for millions more.

Engineer CH2M has been given permission to dump 3,000 savers from the Halcrow scheme into the lifeboat Pension Protection Fund after arguing it has no legal responsibility for the promises made to the British workers before it took over the 148-year-old company in 2011.

Since then, the black hole on the Halcrow final salary scheme has climbed to £500million. And now, in a deal that is thought to be the first of its kind, CH2M has managed to argue that pensioners must accept lower retirement incomes than they were promised or have the scheme handed over to the PPF.

Colorado-based CH2M – which has a number of lucrative contracts including work on the High Speed 2 Railway – is solvent and made a £60million profit last year.

It is a move that experts believe poses a threat to thousands of other company schemes which have giant pension deficits, particularly those with foreign owners.

Labour MP John Mann, who sits on the Treasury Select Committee, said: ‘This could set a dangerous precedent for other foreign firms buying UK companies.
‘These employees have paid into the pension and this company shouldn’t be trying to wriggle out of its responsibilities.’ CH2M said that without being able to pare back generous annual cost of living increases the scheme’s members receive, it will have no choice but to put Halcrow into insolvency.

The deal has been thrashed out by CH2M, the Pensions Regulator and the trustees of the Halcrow Pension Scheme.

In a further twist, the Mail can reveal that the chairman of the trustees of the Halcrow scheme is Chris Martin, who is also chairman of the BHS pension scheme which is set to fall into the hands of the PPF.

The move tears apart an important principle of pensions law, which is that any benefits promised to savers cannot be reversed.

Savers must either accept being put into a new pension scheme set up by the company or being pushed into the Pension Protection Fund. In the former option anyone with a pension built up before 1997 will effectively see it frozen.

Pensions built after this date will receive cost of living increases in line with the consumer price index.

This is likely to be far lower than the up to five per cent annual increases they receive now. If members do not accept this deal they will have their nest eggs taken over by the pensions lifeboat.

With this arrangement those who have not yet retired will receive 90 per cent of their annual payout up to a limit of £34,470 a year, as well as reductions to cost of living increases.

A spokesman for the Pensions Regulator said: ‘These types of pension restructuring are permitted under law, but have stringent conditions attached so that they are not abused. We will only agree to them in rare circumstances.’

A CH2M spokesman said: ‘The interests of members have at all times been very well protected.’ ”

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3670604/Secret-deal-sink-final-salary-schemes-Millions-savers-threat-giant-wins-landmark-fight-walk-away-UK-pension-fund.html

Oliver Letwin (2) – privatise, privatise, privatise – including the NHS

The man David Cameron just put in charge of the government’s Brexit policy (see post directly below)

Oliver Letwin books andpamphlet:

Oliver Letwin and John Redwood. (1988)

Britain’s Biggest Enterprise – ideas for radical reform of the NHS

“… four out of five main recommendations made in the 20-page pamphlet are already being put into place.

Britain’s Biggest Enterprise :

– calls the NHS “a bureaucratic monster that cannot be tamed”.
– says the NHS needs “radical reform” and “revolutionary ideas”.
– claims waiting lists were caused by the “system itself” rather than a lack of funds, and that spending more money would simply increase waiting lists.

It makes these five recommendations:
1) Establishment of the NHS as an independent trust.
2) Increased use of joint ventures between the NHS and private sector
3) Extending the principle of charging

Source: http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/06/03/revealed-the-pamphlet-underpinning-tory-plans-to-privatise-the-nhs/

 

Oliver Letwin (1988)

Privatising the World: A Study of International Privatisation in Theory and Practice

Amazon Books 1 star Review:

This is the well spring of what they are doing to our country. The owners of the snouts in the trough that cannot bear to think of any money, any transaction happening without a profit being made for a shareholder or a bank, or Letwin’s friends like Cameron, Osborne and Hunt. An appalling treatise on how greed is right and the public interest is wrong. How to dismantle the stuff that glues us together and sell it off to corporate cartels – the failure of the fuel market, the chaos of our “privatised” railways, the reluctance of bus companies to run unprofitable routes, zero hours contracts – all of these should be warnings of where this sort of poisoned, anti social thinking can lead. Read this book and be afraid.

 

Rich get profit, poor get blame

“On Wednesday, two very different men will have to explain themselves. Both appear in London, to a room full of authority figures – but their finances and their status place them at opposite ends of our power structure. Yet put them together and a picture emerges of the skewedness of today’s Britain.

For the Rev Paul Nicolson, the venue will be a magistrate’s court in London. His “crime” is refusing to pay his council tax, in protest against David Cameron’s effective scrapping of council tax benefit, part of his swingeing cuts to social security. In order to pay for a financial crisis they didn’t cause, millions of families already on low incomes are sinking deeper into poverty. In order to pay bills they can’t afford, neighbours of the retired vicar are going without food. The 84-year-old faces jail this week, for the sake of £2,831.

Meanwhile, a chauffeur will drive Philip Green to parliament, where he’ll be quizzed by MPs over his part in the collapse of BHS. A business nearly as old as the Queen will die within a few weeks, leaving 11,000 workers out of a job and 22,000 members of its pension scheme facing a poorer retirement.

There the similarities peter out. Nicolson was summoned to court; Green wasn’t going to bother showing up at Westminster. When the multibillionaire was invited by Frank Field to make up BHS’s £600m pension black hole, he demanded the MP resign as chair of the work and pensions select committee.

But then, Green is used to cherry-picking which rules he plays by. Take this example: he buys Arcadia, the company that owns Topshop, then arranges for it to give his wife a dividend of £1.2bn. Since Tina Green is, conveniently, a resident of Monaco, the tax savings on that one payment alone are worth an estimated £300m. That would fund the building of 10 large secondary schools – or two-thirds of the annual cut to council tax benefits.

Just as Green underinvests in society, so he underinvests in his companies. The man to whom he sold BHS last year, Dominic Chappell, told MPs last week that “for the past 10 or 12 years there had been little or no inward investment in the stores”. A staple of the high street had been run down.

Then again, what incentive has he had to do otherwise? Green bought BHS with just £20m of family money and borrowed the rest. Within four years, he had pulled £400m of dividends out of the firm – 20 times his initial outlay.

He used the same tactic to buy Arcadia – stumping up £9.2m in equity and taking out £1.2bn three years later. This isn’t retailing as you might think of it, it’s balance-sheet shazam – the kind of financial engineering that posed as real business in Britain’s bubble years. And it’s enabled Green to turn major retailers into what Robert Peston, in Who Runs Britain?, calls “giant gushers of cash”.

But in today’s Britain, the poor are forced to pay the unaffordable, while the tax-avoider is honoured for his contribution to society. Green was knighted by Tony Blair, while David Cameron appointed him a government adviser.

Just as Green pretends to be a cheeky chappy even though he went to boarding school, so any charlatan in pinstripes can claim to be a businessperson – and be handsomely rewarded. The barons who run our rail services tout themselves as “investors”, but for every quid they put into their trains, they take out £2.47. That level of underinvestment ensures commuters are never sure of getting in on time and having a seat – but shareholders and managers can make a fortune.

From Margaret Thatcher through Tony Blair to David Cameron, successive prime ministers have preached the virtues of free enterprise. We’ve ended up with an economy comprised of what parliament’s public accounts committee calls “quasi-monopolies” – from water to banks to electricity to public outsourcing – and big businesses being treated as money-sponges to be wrung dry by their owners and managers. …”

http://gu.com/p/4yxn9

Sidmouth isn’t Brighton – but WE knew that!

So, in its wisdom, EDDC’s Asset Management Forum (Chairman, Geoff Pook) decided to compare East Devon with Brighton and to almost double rents for beach hut sites.

Result? 115 people gave up their huts (out of a total if 445), people on waiting lists declined offers and empty sites abounded. They had to resort to advertising on the huts in Sidmouth to get people to take them up.

If sites ARE taken up all it now proves is that:

A. Sidmouth – and Exmouth, Budleigh and Seaton are NOT Brighton.
B. The Asset Management has no idea what asset management is.
C. Only the really well-off can now afford to rent sites.

Thanks Councillor Pook, thanks for nothing.

Tax avoidance isn’t the only problem …

“The Guardian has calculated that Green and his family collected £586m [from BHS] in dividends, rental payments and interest on loans during their 15-year ownership of BHS. Over the same period, the group’s pension fund went from a surplus to a deficit of £571m.”

http://gu.com/p/4tjzf

So, basically, Green robbed the pension fund, avoided tax, got a knighthood from Labour and was appointed “Waste Czar” by the Coalition!

Interestingly, Journalist Will Straw spotted this anomaly in August 2010 when he wrote an article entitled “Philip Green is an odd choice for efficiency tsar” in which he wrote:

Philip Green is clearly a savvy businessman, but his avoidance of tax raises questions about his suitability:

Earlier this week, David Cameron wrote in the Sun: “Cutting benefit fraud is a no-brainer. That’s why benefit fraud is the first and the deepest cut we will make.” Launching his one-sided crusade there was no mention of the tax gap, which dwarfs welfare and tax credit fraud by a factor of more than 10 to one. Cameron has now added insult to injury by appointing Sir Philip Green – a tax avoider – as his efficiency tsar.

David Cameron’s focus this week on tackling “welfare cheats” has underlined his priorities. The coalition is committed to an ideological programme of spending cuts worth £83bn by the end of this parliament – 60% more than planned by the Labour government. But, as the Guardian reported, there is just £1.5bn in benefit and tax credit fraud – the rest is due to system failure. Compare this with the £17bn on tax avoidance, evasion and non-payment identified in HMRC’s Protecting Tax Revenues report and you get a sense of whether we’re really “all in this together”.

Tax avoidance is not a crime, but it is certainly a poor qualification for taking on a new role as head of an “external efficiency review”. In 2006, using figures calculated by campaigning accountant Richard Murphy, the BBC’s Money Programme reported that Philip Green and his family had saved themselves nearly £300m the previous year living partly in Monaco, where residents do not have to pay income tax. …”

HMRC to stop collecting data on richest one per cent

“Institute for Fiscal Studies warns about accumulation of wealth by top 1% and says HMRC proposals to stop collecting data would create misleading picture:

Proposals by the UK government to stop collecting information showing how the wealthy pass on their assets from one generation to another have been condemned by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, a leading tax and spending thinktank.

The IFS said Britain was in danger of allowing a misleading picture to emerge of its richest families – the top 1% whose wealth is at least £1.4m including the value of their home – that underestimates their wealth.

The warning follows a debate about the assets and influence of Britain’s top 1% of wealthy households following the leak of the Panama Papers, which revealed the offshore holdings of many rich individuals.

The IFS said calculations that failed to include the often complex web of trusts and jointly owned properties that the richest families use to avoid capital gains and inheritance tax would depress the overall measure of wealth.

It said that in 2005 the under-recording and differences in valuation of inherited estates increased the total from £3.4tn to £4tn.

The inclusion of family trusts, jointly owned properties and small properties, which the IFS said were excluded from the standard published data, raised the total to £5tn – 46% higher than the total initially identified by officials.

A special issue of the IFS journal Fiscal Studies argues that the accumulation of wealth by the top 1% has meant the “younger generations are on course to have less wealth at each point in life than earlier generations”.

Adding to a welter of analysis that points to wealth – rather than incomes – providing the biggest split in society, it said inheritances will do little to even out the spread of wealth, leaving younger people from poorer families unable to acquire assets already in the hands of the top 1%.

The IFS said the acquisition of expensive houses, generous occupational pensions and trust funds in offshore havens have helped to cement the wealth of the top 1% for their children and grandchildren.

In response to moves by HMRC to stop gathering wealth data on the top 1%, the report said: “Wealth is a key determinant of wellbeing. It matters to households whether they have enough savings to see themselves through retirement and it matters for how they would respond to economic shocks and to fiscal and monetary policy. So understanding the distribution of wealth matters.

“So it is concerning that HMRC have consulted on discontinuing their publication of statistics on top shares of wealth, which are derived from data on bequests. These statistics have for decades given us the only, albeit imperfect, window into the wealth of the very richest,” they said.

A spokesman for HMRC said: “We will continue to publish statistics on wealth, but we have asked for views on whether HMRC should continue to produce wealth statistics in the way we currently do as the data we use is derived from inheritance tax information. Since 2006 the ONS have issued regular wealth surveys, but based on household assets. We want to streamline this.”

The report’s authors said ONS wealth surveys relied on feedback from households over a long period of time and many respondents had given up filling in survey forms by the time they retired. It also missed out on probate data that documents household wealth when a respondent is deceased.

“We have been learning a lot about the wealth distribution in recent years, especially following the introduction of the Wealth and Assets Survey. But this survey cannot tell us much about the top 1% who hold around 20% of household wealth,” they said.”

http://gu.com/p/4tem2

Dorset cuts services and vastly increases managers’ pay ‘because they are worth it’

” … The item was listed as exempt in the staffing committee meeting, meaning press and public could not attend, but minutes published online since reveal that the committee recommended the pay rise for approval.

Heads of service are currently paid between £63,348 and £79,714 per year. The new pay structure would mean heads of service are paid a chief officer salary of £80,500 to £85,000 (Band 4) or £86,500 to £91,000 (Band 3).

Wages for all the heads of services are available in documents publicly available online and research by the Dorset Echo reveals that if all 15 heads of service are given the pay rise to the lowest end of Band 4, the annual cost would be £61,443.62.

A spokesman for the county council confirmed that six heads of service would be eligible for a band three and nine would be eligible for band four.

In the minutes from the meeting, the pay increases are justified by stating that the role has ‘changed significantly’ and there has been a reduction of heads of services over the last 10 years.

But Amanda Brown, Dorchester branch secretary for Unison, said the rise is ‘just not acceptable’. …”

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/14436155.Council_cutting_services_gives_managers_a_pay_rise___but_they_deserve_it__says_report/?ref=twt

Where Dorset leads no doubt Devon and Somerset will follow.

Wonder how much our LEP members pay themselves …